Opticallimits

Hello,



I'm new here and was hoping that someone could help diagnose potential problems with my lens. It's like this: I've noticed a distinct lack of sharpness recently with my 18-55mm (non-VR) Nikon D40 kit lens and am not sure if I'm just using the wrong settings or if I knocked some lens element out of alignment that's causing these issues. I've been using the same camera/lens for about 4 years now and it's only in the past couple of months that the photos don't look as sharp, which makes me think that it's something to do with the lens since I've been shooting at the same aperture, exposure comp settings as I've always been. I've had it looked at a Nikon service center and they couldn't seem to find anything wrong with my lens or camera but they also wanted me to shoot landscapes at f/22 despite my protestations about diffraction effects so I'm not sure how knowledgable they were (especially since this was in India - I'm currently traveling). I'm wondering if folks have any thoughts on whether there is a genuine problem here with my equipment or I'm just a lousy photographer who doesn't know what aperture to use when. The problem seems to be most pronounced when there are objects/background at a range of distances because photos where the whole frame comprises of one object at one distance (like a painting) seem to come out fine. I like shooting landscapes so this 'problem' is annoying.



I don't think it's an auto-focus issue as I've tried both auto and manual focus and it persists. And auto-focus works great on images at just one distance.



Unfortunately, I don't really have access to another lens to see if it performs better.



I've attached some recent images here in the hope that someone can help. Problems are more evident when seen full-size.



Thanks!

[quote name='abcx' timestamp='1334564912' post='17535']

Hello,



I'm new here and was hoping that someone could help diagnose potential problems with my lens. It's like this: I've noticed a distinct lack of sharpness recently with my 18-55mm (non-VR) Nikon D40 kit lens and am not sure if I'm just using the wrong settings or if I knocked some lens element out of alignment that's causing these issues. I've been using the same camera/lens for about 4 years now and it's only in the past couple of months that the photos don't look as sharp, which makes me think that it's something to do with the lens since I've been shooting at the same aperture, exposure comp settings as I've always been. I've had it looked at a Nikon service center and they couldn't seem to find anything wrong with my lens or camera but they also wanted me to shoot landscapes at f/22 despite my protestations about diffraction effects so I'm not sure how knowledgable they were (especially since this was in India - I'm currently traveling). I'm wondering if folks have any thoughts on whether there is a genuine problem here with my equipment or I'm just a lousy photographer who doesn't know what aperture to use when. The problem seems to be most pronounced when there are objects/background at a range of distances because photos where the whole frame comprises of one object at one distance (like a painting) seem to come out fine. I like shooting landscapes so this 'problem' is annoying.



I don't think it's an auto-focus issue as I've tried both auto and manual focus and it persists. And auto-focus works great on images at just one distance.



Unfortunately, I don't really have access to another lens to see if it performs better.



I've attached some recent images here in the hope that someone can help. Problems are more evident when seen full-size.



Thanks!

[/quote]





Hi, I've just been browsing your photos and to be honest they look pretty good to me! You don't state what exposure/aperture they were taken at. The lens looks well centered, very slight softness equally at the left and right edges but without at least the knowing the aperture it's difficult to make constructive comment.Maybe they lack a bit of "pop" but then there's distance haze that reduces the contrast.

Are they processed from RAW files or are they JPGs direct from the camera? To me,a bit of extra contrast dialed in with a bit of sharpening and your not far away,it's only the standard kit lens after all! I'm looking at a small part of them on a 82cm screen which is fairly demanding,maybe if you could post a photo from when you thought it was performing Ok. I've heard stories of general wear when used a lot over a period of time. I think more info is needed.



Dave's clichés

[quote name='dave's clichés' timestamp='1334567712' post='17536']

Hi, I've just been browsing your photos and to be honest they look pretty good to me! You don't state what exposure/aperture they were taken at. The lens looks well centered, very slight softness equally at the left and right edges but without at least the knowing the aperture it's difficult to make constructive comment.Maybe they lack a bit of "pop" but then there's distance haze that reduces the contrast.

Are they processed from RAW files or are they JPGs direct from the camera? To me,a bit of extra contrast dialed in with a bit of sharpening and your not far away,it's only the standard kit lens after all! I'm looking at a small part of them on a 82cm screen which is fairly demanding,maybe if you could post a photo from when you thought it was performing Ok. I've heard stories of general wear when used a lot over a period of time. I think more info is needed.



Dave's clichés

[/quote]



Hi,

Thanks for the reply. These were taken at f/8 - my usual for shots where I want a range of things in focus. 50mm focal length, ISO 200, 1/320s. I save RAW + Fine Jpeg and this is the fine JPEG straight from the camera. The RAW doesn't look a lot better.



I thought it was background haze too initially but I've found that the 'haze' has now been cropping up in almost all shooting conditions.



Here are two photos from Hawaii and California where I thought the camera was working fine:

http://abcx13.deviantart.com/art/Hawaii-...bcx13&qo=0

http://abcx13.deviantart.com/art/Lost-Co...bcx13&qo=1



and here are two recent photos from Bhutan which I think are fine too but as I mentioned they are mostly at one distance:



http://abcx13.deviantart.com/art/Bhutan-...bcx13&qo=2

http://abcx13.deviantart.com/art/Bhutan-...bcx13&qo=3



DeviantArt shows the EXIF info too and you can blow up the image to the full size which will give you the JPEG straight from the camera. Some more recent photos where I think the focus/quality is problematic:



http://abcx13.deviantart.com/art/Dartmoor-296398025

http://abcx13.deviantart.com/art/Dartmoor-NP-296398195



Sorry I can't post images inline due to the attachment limit so I uploaded them to deviantart.

I highly recommend visiting the Lens Test FAQ section of this website. [url="http://www.opticallimits.com/Reviews/lens-test-faq"]http://www.photozone...s/lens-test-faq[/url] Scroll down to the bottom of the page, and you will see a procedure outlined in the answer to the last question: "How can I find out whether my lens has a problems ?" This will give you an idea of the condition of your lens. Make sure that you follow the instructions exactly as a failure to do so will result in inaccurate results. good luck.

[quote name='abcx' timestamp='1334573714' post='17538']

Hi,

Thanks for the reply. These were taken at f/8 - my usual for shots where I want a range of things in focus. 50mm focal length, ISO 200, 1/320s. I save RAW + Fine Jpeg and this is the fine JPEG straight from the camera. The RAW doesn't look a lot better.



I thought it was background haze too initially but I've found that the 'haze' has now been cropping up in almost all shooting conditions.



Here are two photos from Hawaii and California where I thought the camera was working fine:

[url="http://abcx13.deviantart.com/art/Hawaii-296396974?q=gallery%3Aabcx13&qo=0"]http://abcx13.devian...y%3Aabcx13&qo=0[/url]

[url="http://abcx13.deviantart.com/art/Lost-Coast-CA-296396787?q=gallery%3Aabcx13&qo=1"]http://abcx13.devian...y%3Aabcx13&qo=1[/url]



and here are two recent photos from Bhutan which I think are fine too but as I mentioned they are mostly at one distance:



[url="http://abcx13.deviantart.com/art/Bhutan-296395417?q=gallery%3Aabcx13&qo=2"]http://abcx13.devian...y%3Aabcx13&qo=2[/url]

[url="http://abcx13.deviantart.com/art/Bhutan-296395260?q=gallery%3Aabcx13&qo=3"]http://abcx13.devian...y%3Aabcx13&qo=3[/url]



DeviantArt shows the EXIF info too and you can blow up the image to the full size which will give you the JPEG straight from the camera. Some more recent photos where I think the focus/quality is problematic:



[url="http://abcx13.deviantart.com/art/Dartmoor-296398025"]http://abcx13.devian...tmoor-296398025[/url]

[url="http://abcx13.deviantart.com/art/Dartmoor-NP-296398195"]http://abcx13.devian...or-NP-296398195[/url]



Sorry I can't post images inline due to the attachment limit so I uploaded them to deviantart.

[/quote]



Hi,



I think the sharpness of the images you've linked are ok. But of course the sharpness of an image that D40 can deliver with the 6mp sensor might be limited for some cases. Although f/8 or f/9 should not be a problem in terms of visable diffraction effects, the very fine textures (like the bushes in foreground on your last linked image) could be challenging for a 6mp DX sensor. Smaller apertures like f/8 - f/10 in general ensure enough DoF with a wide angle lens. But not always... If we ignore the lens' optical quality; the aperture, focused distance and the size of the smallest object to be resolved are essential. At least that's how I know it <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />...



In cases where you don't use that 18-55mm with very closer subjects, I suggest you try to focus at infinity aperture set to f/11-13. Of course it is not a magic formula for all cases (and diffraction might steal more from res.), but it usually works if you don't aim for a subject in close focus.



PS: One of the first samples you've attached has low contrast, but I think it's because of your viewing angle when you've made the shot.



Serkan

um this might not help but, i had a 40X and to achieve pictures that looked detailed i had to use a nikon super lens such as the 70-200 or 200-400 or a nik super prime to realise a 'sharp' looking picture - with a lesser lens the pictures, although nice, were definitely rather more soft, less detailed, and not unlike what i'm seeing here - therefore rather characteristic from such a sensor -



likewise for example, i thought that k's recent art deco pix were lovely but softish and therefore i thought demo'd well the results that have been at question from the nex7's sensor ….. so your lovely pictures might be about right from that camera - but this all could be wrong, it can be hard to tell from web pictures sometimes

[quote name='abcx' timestamp='1334573714' post='17538']

Hi,

Thanks for the reply. These were taken at f/8 - my usual for shots where I want a range of things in focus. 50mm focal length, ISO 200, 1/320s. I save RAW + Fine Jpeg and this is the fine JPEG straight from the camera. The RAW doesn't look a lot better.



I thought it was background haze too initially but I've found that the 'haze' has now been cropping up in almost all shooting conditions.



Here are two photos from Hawaii and California where I thought the camera was working fine:

http://abcx13.deviantart.com/art/Hawaii-...bcx13&qo=0

http://abcx13.deviantart.com/art/Lost-Co...bcx13&qo=1



and here are two recent photos from Bhutan which I think are fine too but as I mentioned they are mostly at one distance:



http://abcx13.deviantart.com/art/Bhutan-...bcx13&qo=2

http://abcx13.deviantart.com/art/Bhutan-...bcx13&qo=3



DeviantArt shows the EXIF info too and you can blow up the image to the full size which will give you the JPEG straight from the camera. Some more recent photos where I think the focus/quality is problematic:



http://abcx13.deviantart.com/art/Dartmoor-296398025

http://abcx13.deviantart.com/art/Dartmoor-NP-296398195



Sorry I can't post images inline due to the attachment limit so I uploaded them to deviantart.

[/quote]



Hi again,

Well I'm flicking from one photo to another and the forest waterfall scene doesn't look anymore contrasty than the dartmoor scene,in fact the opposite, I'm really struggling not to reiterate the word "haze" and "angle of light" but then I wasn't there!

At F8 the lens seems decently sharp,all but the extreme corners so it's not a problem with sharpness.(there is a small problem of DR, the clouds are burnt white a bit) I know it might sound a silly question,is the glass completely clear? Other than that see if you can find/borrow another lens to try, if you have a comparison between the shots it's a lots more obvious.

UV filters,I have found several instances of degregation of image using UV filters? or UV haze by a lack of them, also did you have a lens hood fitted?

To me I think I'd be happy given that it is a kit lens,I'd process in RAW jack up the contrast try and recuperate the burnt clouds and go away fairly happy!

I call it how I see it.



Dave's clichés

Hi,

Is your lens clear? If you have penlight, check lens internal elements, open and close diaphragm - oil droplets might cause haze. I'd suggest to take few pics on good lightning conditions (no harsh light, not against the light source, etc.) at different FLs and then judge about the results. For me pics at longer FL (24 - 50mm) looks worse than at 18mm (overall, not just borders/corners), but that might be caused by different lightning conditions or inherent zoom performance.



A.